Support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention

Risk for surgical positioning injuries: scale validation in a rehabilitation hospital

OBJECTIVE

to validate the Risk Assessment Scale for the Development of Injuries due to Surgical Positioning in the stratification of risk for injury development in perioperative patients at a rehabilitation hospital.

METHOD

analytical, longitudinal and quantitative study. An instrument and the scale were used in the three perioperative phases in 106 patients. The data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.

RESULTS

most patients showed high risk for perioperative injuries, both in the scale score with estimated time and in the real-time score, with a mean of 19.97 (±3.02) and 19.96 (±3.12), respectively. Most participants did not show skin lesions (87.8%) or pain (92.5%). Inferential analysis enabled us to assert that the scale scores are associated with the appearance of injuries resulting from positioning, therefore, it can adequately predict that low-risk patients are unlikely to have injuries and those at high risk are more likely to develop injuries.

CONCLUSION

the scale validation is shown by the association of scores with the appearance of injuries, therefore, it is a valid and useful tool, and it can guide the clinical practice of perioperative nurses in rehabilitation hospitals in order to reduce risk for injuries due to surgical positioning.

Distinct Skin Microbiome and Skin Physiological Functions Between Bedridden Older Patients and Healthy People: A Single-Center Study in Japan

With the increase in the older populations, the number of bedridden older patients is becoming a matter of concern. Skin microbiome and skin physiological functions are known to change according to lifestyle and community; however, such changes in case of movement- and cleaning-restricted bedridden older patients have not yet been revealed. To address this issue, we analyzed skin microbiome and skin physiological functions, including pH, hydration, sebum level, and transepidermal water loss (TEWL), of bedridden older patients, compared with those of ambulatory older and young individuals. For this analysis, we enrolled 19 healthy young and 18 ambulatory older individuals from the community and 31 bedridden older patients from a single, long-term care hospital in Japan. The area of interest was set to the sacral (lower back) skin, where pressure injuries (PIs) and subsequent infection frequently occurs in bedridden older patients. We observed a higher number of gut-related bacteria, fewer commensals, higher skin pH, and lower TEWL on the sacral skin of bedridden older patients than on that of young or ambulatory older individuals. In addition, we observed that 4 of the 31 bedridden older patients developed PIs during the research period; a higher abundance of pathogenic skin bacteria were also observed inside the PI wounds. These findings imply distinct skin microbiome and skin physiological functions in bedridden older patients in comparison with healthy individuals and may suggest the need for more stringent cleaning of the skin of bedridden older patients in light of the closeness of skin and wound microbiome.

Lateral pressure equalisation as a principle for designing support surfaces to prevent deep tissue pressure ulcers

When immobile or neuropathic patients are supported by beds or chairs, their soft tissues undergo deformations that can cause pressure ulcers. Current support surfaces that redistribute under-body pressures at vulnerable body sites have not succeeded in reducing pressure ulcer prevalence. Here we show that adding a supporting lateral pressure can counter-act the deformations induced by under-body pressure, and that this 'pressure equalisation' approach is a more effective way to reduce ulcer-inducing deformations than current approaches based on redistributing under-body pressure. A finite element model of the seated pelvis predicts that applying a lateral pressure to the soft tissue reduces peak von Mises stress in the deep tissue by a factor of 2.4 relative to a standard cushion (from 113 kPa to 47 kPa)-a greater effect than that achieved by using a more conformable cushion, which reduced von Mises stress to 75 kPa. Combining both a conformable cushion and lateral pressure reduced peak von Mises stresses to 25 kPa. The ratio of peak lateral pressure to peak under-body pressure was shown to regulate deep tissue stress better than under-body pressure alone. By optimising the magnitude and position of lateral pressure, tissue deformations can be reduced to that induced when suspended in a fluid. Our results explain the lack of efficacy in current support surfaces and suggest a new approach to designing and evaluating support surfaces: ensuring sufficient lateral pressure is applied to counter-act under-body pressure.

Pressure ulcer Cat. II-IV incidence on the CuroCell S.A.M. PRO powered reactive air support surface in a high-risk population: A multicentre cohort study in 12 Belgian nursing homes

The primary objective was to study pressure ulcer (PU) category II-IV (including suspected deep tissue injury and unstageable PUs) cumulative incidence and PU incidence density, in a 30day observation period, associated with the use of the CuroCell S.A.M. PRO powered reactive air support surface in nursing home residents at risk for PU development. Secondary objectives were to study (a) PU category I cumulative incidence and PU incidence density and (b) user (caregivers and residents) experiences and perceptions of comfort associated with the use of the support surface under study. A multicentre cohort study was set up in 37 care units of 12 Belgian nursing homes. The sample consisted of 191 residents at risk of PU development (Braden score ≤ 17). The cumulative PU incidence was 4.7% (n = 9). The PU incidence density was 1.7/1000 observation days (9 PU/5370 days). The experience and perceptions of comfort analysis revealed that the CuroCell S.A.M. PRO powered reactive air support surface was comfortable for daily use. The mode of action and the quietness of the pump function had a positive impact on sleep quality. Patient comfort and sleep quality are essential criteria in the selection of a support surface.

Morphology and composition play distinct and complementary roles in the tolerance of plantar skin to mechanical load

Plantar skin on the soles of the feet has a distinct morphology and composition that is thought to enhance its tolerance to mechanical loads, although the individual contributions of morphology and composition have never been quantified. Here, we combine multiscale mechanical testing and computational models of load bearing to quantify the mechanical environment of both plantar and nonplantar skin under load. We find that morphology and composition play distinct and complementary roles in plantar skin's load tolerance. More specifically, the thick stratum corneum provides protection from stress-based injuries such as skin tears and blisters, while epidermal and dermal compositions provide protection from deformation-based injuries such as pressure ulcers. This work provides insights into the roles of skin morphology and composition more generally and will inform the design of engineered skin substitutes as well as the etiology of skin injury.

Pressure Relieving Support Surfaces for Pressure Ulcer Prevention (PRESSURE 2): Clinical and Health Economic Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers (PUs) are complications of serious acute/chronic illness. Specialist mattresses used for prevention lack high quality effectiveness evidence. We aimed to compare clinical and cost effectiveness of 2 mattress types.

METHODS

Multicentre, Phase III, open, prospective, parallel group, randomised controlled trial in 42 UK secondary/community in-patient facilities.2029 high risk (acutely ill, bedfast/chairfast and/or Category 1 PU/pain at PU site) adult in-patients were randomised (1:1, allocation concealment, minimisation with random element) factors including: centre, PU status, facility and consent type. Interventions were alternating pressure mattresses (APMs) or high specification foam (HSF) for maximum treatment phase 60 days. Primary outcome was time to development of new PU Category ≥ 2 from randomisation to 30 day post-treatment follow-up in intention-to treat population. Trial registration: ISRCTN 01151335.

FINDINGS

Between August 2013 and November 2016, we randomised 2029 patients (1016 APMs: 1013 HSF) who developed 160(7.9%) PUs. There was insufficient evidence of a difference between groups for time to new PU Category ≥ 2 Fine and Gray Model Hazard Ratio HR = 0.76, 95%CI0.56-1.04); exact P = 0.0890; absolute difference 2%). There was a statistically significant difference in the treatment phase time to event sensitivity analysis, Fine and Gray model HR = 0.66, 95%CI, 0.46-0.93; exact P = 0.0176); 2.6% absolute difference). Economic analyses indicate that APM are cost-effective.There were no safety concerns.

INTERPRETATION

In high risk (acutely ill, bedfast/chairfast/Category 1 PU/ pain on a PU site) in-patients, we found insufficient evidence of a difference in time to PU development at 30-day final follow-up, which may be related to a low event rate affecting trial power. APMs conferred a small treatment phase benefit. Patient preference, low PU incidence and small group differences suggests the need for improved targeting of APMs with decision making informed by patient preference/comfort/rehabilitation needs and the presence of potentially modifiable risk factors such as being completely immobile, nutritional deficits, lacking capacity and/or altered skin/Category1 PU.

Comparing alternating pressure mattresses and high-specification foam mattresses to prevent pressure ulcers in high-risk patients: the PRESSURE 2 RCT

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers (PUs) are a burden to patients, carers and health-care providers. Specialist mattresses minimise the intensity and duration of pressure on vulnerable skin sites in at-risk patients.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

Time to developing a new PU of category ≥ 2 in patients using an alternating pressure mattress (APM) compared with a high-specification foam mattress (HSFM).

DESIGN

A multicentre, Phase III, open, prospective, planned as an adaptive double-triangular group sequential, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with an a priori sample size of 2954 participants. Randomisation used minimisation (incorporating a random element).

SETTING

The trial was set in 42 secondary and community inpatient facilities in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult inpatients with evidence of acute illness and at a high risk of PU development.

INTERVENTIONS AND FOLLOW-UP

APM or HSFM - the treatment phase lasted a maximum of 60 days; the final 30 days were post-treatment follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time to event.

RESULTS

From August 2013 to November 2016, 2029 participants were randomised to receive either APM (n = 1016) or HSFM (n = 1013). Primary end point - 30-day final follow-up: of the 2029 participants in the intention-to-treat population, 160 (7.9%) developed a new PU of category ≥ 2. There was insufficient evidence of a difference between groups for time to new PU of category ≥ 2 [Fine and Gray model HR 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 1.04; exact p-value of 0.0890 and 2% absolute difference]. Treatment phase sensitivity analysis: 132 (6.5%) participants developed a new PU of category ≥ 2 between randomisation and end of treatment phase. There was a statistically significant difference in the treatment phase time-to-event sensitivity analysis (Fine and Gray model HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.93; p = 0.0176 and 2.6% absolute difference). Secondary end points - 30-day final follow-up: new PUs of category ≥ 1 developed in 350 (17.2%) participants, with no evidence of a difference between mattress groups in time to PU development, (Fine and Gray model HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.02; p-value = 0.0733 and absolute difference 3.1%). New PUs of category ≥ 3 developed in 32 (1.6%) participants with insufficient evidence of a difference between mattress groups in time to PU development (Fine and Gray model HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.62; p = 0.5530 and absolute difference 0.4%). Of the 145 pre-existing PUs of category 2, 89 (61.4%) healed - there was insufficient evidence of a difference in time to healing (Fine and Gray model HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.68; p = 0.6122 and absolute difference 2.9%). Health economics - the within-trial and long-term analysis showed APM to be cost-effective compared with HSFM; however, the difference in costs models are small and the quality-adjusted life-year gains are very small. There were no safety concerns. Blinded photography substudy - the reliability of central blinded review compared with clinical assessment for PUs of category ≥ 2 was 'very good' (kappa statistic 0.82, prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa 0.82). Quality-of-life substudy - the Pressure Ulcer Quality of Life - Prevention (PU-QoL-P) instrument meets the established criteria for reliability, construct validity and responsiveness.

LIMITATIONS

A lower than anticipated event rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In acutely ill inpatients who are bedfast/chairfast and/or have a category 1 PU and/or localised skin pain, APMs confer a small treatment phase benefit that is diminished over time. Overall, the APM patient compliance, very low PU incidence rate observed and small differences between mattresses indicate the need for improved indicators for targeting of APMs and individualised decision-making. Decisions should take into account skin status, patient preferences (movement ability and rehabilitation needs) and the presence of factors that may be potentially modifiable through APM allocation, including being completely immobile, having nutritional deficits, lacking capacity and/or having altered skin/category 1 PU.

FUTURE WORK

Explore the relationship between mental capacity, levels of independent movement, repositioning and PU development. Explore 'what works for whom and in what circumstances'.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN01151335.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 52. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Outcomes for Pressure Ulcer Trials (OUTPUTs): protocol for the development of a core domain set for trials evaluating the clinical efficacy or effectiveness of pressure ulcer prevention interventions

BACKGROUND

Core outcome sets (COS) are being developed in many clinical areas to increase the quality and comparability of clinical trial results as well as to ensure their relevance for patients. A COS represents an agreed standardized set of outcomes that describes the minimum that should be consistently reported in all clinical trials of a defined area. It comprises a core domain set (defining what core outcomes should be measured) and a core measurement set (defining measurement/assessment instruments for each core domain). For pressure ulcer prevention trials a COS is lacking. The great heterogeneity of reported outcomes in this field indicates the need for a COS.

METHODS/DESIGN

The first part of this project aims to develop a core domain set by following established methods, which incorporates four steps: (1) definition of the scope, (2) conducting a scoping review, (3) organizing facilitated workshops with service users, (4) performing Delphi surveys and establishing consensus in a face-to-face meeting with different stakeholders.

DISCUSSION

After achieving consensus on the core domain set, further work will be undertaken to determine a corresponding core measurement set. This will lead to better pressure ulcer prevention research in the future. There are a number of methodological challenges in the field of COS development. To meet these challenges and to ensure a high-quality COS, the OUTPUTS project affiliates to current standards and works in close collaboration with international experts and with existing international service user groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The OUTPUTs project is registered in the COMET database: ( http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/283 ). Registered on 2015.

Pressure Injury Prevention: A Survey

Pressure injuries are caused by prolonged pressure to an area of the body, which can result in open wounds that descend to the bone. Pressure injuries should not occur in healthcare settings, and yet, they still affect 2.5 million patients in the United States and have an impact on quality of life. Pressure injuries come at a cost of $11 billion in the United States, and 90% of pressure injuries are a secondary condition. In this paper, we survey the literature on preventative techniques to address pressure injures, which we classify into two categories: active prevention strategies and sensor-based risk-factor monitoring. Within each category of techniques, we discuss the literature and assess each class of strategies based on its commercial availability, results of clinical trials when available, the ability for the strategy to save time for healthcare staff, and whether the technique can be tuned to an individual. Based on our findings, the most promising current solutions, supplementary to nursing guidelines, are electrical stimulation, pressure monitoring, and inertial measurement unit monitoring. We also find a need for a clinical software system that can easily integrate with custom sensors, use custom analysis algorithms, and provide visual feedback to the healthcare staff.

Complex decubitus ulcer therapy in a patient in chronic critical condition: a case report

76.72% of patients admitted to the ICU of the Federal Research and Clinical Center of Intensive Care Medicine and Rehabilitology (FRCC ICMR) in a chronic critical condition (CCC) associated with various types of damage to the brain were diagnosed with decubitus ulcers (DU), or bedsores, of 3rd and/or 4th stage. 33.41% of them were planned to undergo invasive rehabilitation procedures (neurosurgical intervention) that cannot be done while the patient has DU. This report describes a complex technique used to treat a 4th-stage sacrum DU in a CCC patient that needed ventriculoperitoneal shunting. We have covered contraindications to the exclusively surgical DU closing and the successful and rapid healing of the 4th-stage sacrum DU after application of the treatment technique.

Prognostic factors of in-hospital complications after hip fracture surgery: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

To examine prognostic factors that influence complications after hip fracture surgery. To summarize proposed underlying mechanisms for their influence.

METHODS

We reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Scoping Review extension. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AgeLine, Cochrane Library, and reference lists of retrieved studies for studies of prognostic factor/s of postoperative in-hospital medical complication/s among patients 50 years and older treated surgically for non-pathological closed hip fracture, published in English on January 2008-January 2018. We excluded studies of surgery type or in-hospital medications. Screening was duplicated by two independent reviewers. One reviewer completed the extraction with accuracy checks by the second reviewer. We summarized the extent, nature, and proposed underlying mechanisms for the prognostic factors of complications narratively and in a dependency graph.

RESULTS

We identified 44 prognostic factors of in-hospital complications after hip fracture surgery from 56 studies. Of these, we identified 7 patient factors-dehydration, anemia, hypotension, heart rate variability, pressure risk, nutrition, and indwelling catheter use; and 7 process factors-time to surgery, anesthetic type, transfusion strategy, orthopedic versus geriatric/co-managed care, multidisciplinary care pathway, and potentially modifiable during index hospitalization. We identified underlying mechanisms for 15 of 44 factors. The reported association between 12 prognostic factors and complications was inconsistent across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Most factors were reported by one study with no proposed underlying mechanism for their influence. Where reported by more than one study, there was inconsistency in reported associations and the conceptualization of complications differed, limiting comparison across studies. It is therefore not possible to be certain whether intervening on these factors would reduce the rate of complications after hip fracture surgery.

A multicentre prospective randomised controlled clinical trial comparing the effectiveness and cost of a static air mattress and alternating air pressure mattress to prevent pressure ulcers in nursing home residents

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers are a global issue and substantial concern for healthcare systems. Various types of support surfaces that prevent pressure ulcer are available. Data about the effectiveness and cost of static air support surfaces and alternating air pressure mattresses is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and cost of static air support surfaces versus alternating air pressure support surfaces in a nursing home population at high risk for pressure ulcers.

DESIGN

Prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled clinical, non-inferiority trial.

SETTING

Twenty-six nursing homes in Flanders, Belgium.

PARTICIPANTS

A consecutive sample of 308 participants was selected based on the following eligibility criteria: high risk for pressure ulcer and/or with category 1 pressure ulcer, being bedbound and/or chair bound, aged > 65 years, and use of an alternating air pressure mattress.

METHODS

The participants were allocated to the intervention group (n = 154) using static air support surfaces and the control group (n = 154) using alternating air pressure support surfaces. The main outcome measures were cumulative incidence and incidence density of the participants developing a new category II-IV pressure ulcer within a 14-day observation period, time to develop a new pressure ulcer, and purchase costs of the support surfaces.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat analysis revealed a significantly lower incidence of category II-IV pressure ulcer in the intervention group (n = 8/154, 5.2%) than in the control group (n = 18/154, 11.7%) (p = 0.04). The median time to develop a pressure ulcer was significantly longer in the intervention group (10.5 days, interquartile range [IQR]: 1-14) than in the control group (5.4 days, [IQR]: 1-12; p = 0.05). The probability to remain pressure ulcer free differed significantly between the two study groups (log-rank X² = 4.051, df = 1, p = 0.04). The overall cost of the mattress was lower in the intervention group than in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

A static air mattress was significantly more effective than an alternating air pressure mattress in preventing pressure ulcer in a high-risk nursing home population. Considering multiple lifespans and purchase costs, static air mattresses were more cost-effective than alternating air pressure mattresses.

A prospective, randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of the fluid immersion simulation system vs an air-fluidised bed system in the acute postoperative management of pressure ulcers: A midpoint study analysis

The use of pressure-offloading support surfaces is considered the standard of care for pressure ulcers (PUs) by most surgeons. The fluid immersion simulation system (FIS) has shown significant results in previous studies. We compared it, for the first time, with a representative air-fluidised bed (AFB) for outcomes related to post-surgical flap closures. This trial was performed over 25 months, in which 40 subjects between 18 and 85 years of age with ≤2 PUs and history of <3 surgical closures underwent reconstruction by one surgeon. Subjects were randomly assigned to either treatment group for 2 weeks after closure. The primary endpoint was success of closure after the study period. Secondary endpoints included incidence of complications and nursing and patient acceptability of the device. The FIS group included 19 subjects, and the AFB group included 21. Flap failure rate was similar between groups (15% vs 17%; P = .99). The Minor complications rate, particularly dehiscence, was higher in the FIS group (66.7% vs 15%; P = .02). Nurse and patient self-reported acceptability had better mean numeric scores in the FIS compared with AFB (nurse: 1.5 vs 1.9; P = .12; patient: 1.9 vs 2.2; P = .14). Further analysis will be conducted to gain better insight on the FIS as an alternative treatment for PUs.

Efficacy of pressure ulcer prevention interventions in adult intensive care units: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Pressure ulcers (PUs) are associated with substantial health burden. Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk for developing PU. In the absence of large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compare commonly known interventions for preventing PU in ICUs, uncertainty remains around the best practice strategy for PU management in adult ICUs. This study, therefore, aims to identify the most effective interventions and combinations of interventions that prevent PU in adult ICU using systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search for all published and unpublished RCTs evaluating interventions to prevent PU compared with other PU prevention measures or with usual care in adult ICU. The primary outcomes are the incidence of PUs and PU severity in critically ill patients in ICU. The secondary outcomes include number of PUs per patient and intervention-related harms caused by the prevention intervention or intervention-related harms. All data extraction will be performed by at least two independent reviewers on the basis of a priori developed extraction form. We will evaluate the risk of bias of the included RCTs in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool, and assess the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. A standard pairwise meta-analysis and a Bayesian NMA will be conducted to compare the efficacy of different PU prevention interventions. A surface under the cumulative ranking curve will be used to rank the probabilities of each prevention intervention for various outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will not require the ethics approval as it is a review based on published studies. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. We anticipate that the results of the study will provide the evidence to inform clinicians and guideline developers on determining the best interventions for the prevention of PU in ICU patients.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018085562.

Effectiveness of Tragacanth Gel Cushions in Prevention of Pressure Ulcer in Traumatic Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: Introduction: Pressure ulcer is one of the most common and painful complications in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). This study aimed to compare the effects of tragacanth gel cushions and foam-filled ones on the prevention of pressure ulcers. Methods: This triple-blind, randomized, clinical trial was performed on 94 patients admitted to the ICU of Taleqhani Hospital of Mashhad, Iran. The participants were divided into two groups of tragacanth gel pad and foam (n=47 for each group). Both groups received all the routine care. The participants were examined on a daily basis during a ten-day period. We considered sacral region as the most affected site, and the patients with erythema were excluded from the study. To analyze the data, Chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, and t-test were run, using Stata version 12. Results: The data showed significant differences in terms of the incidence of skin redness in the tragacanth gel cushions group and foam cushion group, respectively, 6.84 (1.58) and 5.67 (1.26) days after admission. In addition, in the tragacanth gel cushions group 14 patients (29.7%) did not have skin redness compared with the foam cushion group (8.51%), which indicated a significant difference. Conclusion: This study showed that the use of tragacanth gel cushion is effective in the prevention of pressure ulcers in ICU patients. Cushions filled with tragacanth gel also delayed the onset of erythema. Considering their cost-effectiveness and naturalness, the use of tragacanth gel cushions is recommended to improve the sacral skin health and prevent pressure ulcers.

Reducing hospital-acquired pressure injuries

Hospital-acquired pressure injury is a common preventable condition. Our hospital is a 144-bed governmental hospital in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that was found to have a 7.5% prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injury in 2016. The aim of the improvement project was to reduce the prevalence of pressure injuries in our hospital from 7.5% to below 4% by the end of 2017. Our strategy for improvement was based on the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Model for Improvement. The change strategy was based on implementing an evidence-based risk assessment tool and a bundled evidence-based pressure injury prevention (PIP) intervention termed PIP bundle. After implementing the change package, we observed a reduction in the prevalence of pressure injuries by 84% (RR 0.16;95% CI 0.07 to 0.3; p value <0.0001) over a period of 12 weeks, in addition to an improvement in the compliance of pressure injury risk assessment and PIP interventions. The use of an evidenced-based bundled approach to prevent hospital-acquired pressure injuries has resulted in a significant reduction in the rate of pressure injuries. Improvement results were sustainable. In addition, our outcome measure exhibited minimal variability.

Risk assessment for perioperative pressure injuries

Objectives:

to evaluate and classify patients according to the Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Pressure Injuries; verify the association between sociodemographic and clinical variables and the risk score; and identify the occurrence of pressure injuries due to surgical positioning.

Method:

observational, longitudinal, prospective and quantitative study carried out in a teaching hospital with 278 patients submitted to elective surgeries. A sociodemographic and clinical characterization questionnaire and the Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Pressure Injuries were used. Descriptive, bivariate and logistic regression analyses were applied.

Results:

the majority of patients (56.5%) presented a high risk for perioperative pressure injury. Female sex, elderly group, and altered body mass index values were statistically significant (p < 0.05) for a higher risk of pressure injuries. In 77% of the patients, there were perioperative pressure injuries.

Conclusion:

most of the participants presented a high risk for development of perioperative decubitus ulcers. The female sex, elderly group, and altered body mass index were significant factors for increased risk. The Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Pressure Injuries allows the early identification of risk of injury, subsidizing the adoption of preventive strategies to ensure the quality of perioperative care.

The Effect of Support Surfaces on the Incidence of Pressure Injuries in Critically Ill Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To analyze whether a viscoelastic mattress support surface can reduce the incidence of stage 2 pressure injuries compared to a standard hospital mattress with pyramidal overlay in critically ill patients.

METHOD

A randomized clinical trial with intention-to-treat analysis was carried out recruiting patients with Braden scale ≤14 on intensive care unit admission from April 2016 to April 2017. Patients were allocated into two groups: intervention group (viscoelastic mattress) and control group (standard mattress with pyramidal overlay). The level of significance adopted was 5%.

RESULTS

A total of 62 patients were included in the study. There was a predominance of males (53%) and the mean age was 67.9 (SD 18.8) years. There were no differences in clinical or severity characteristics between the patients in the control group and the intervention group. Pressure injuries occurred in 35 patients, with a median time of 7 days (ITQ 4-10) from admission. The frequency of pressure injuries was higher in the control group (80.6%) compared to the intervention group (32.2%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Viscoelastic support surfaces reduced the incidence of pressure injuries in moderate or higher risk critically ill patients when compared to pyramidal support surfaces.

Independent risk factors for pressure ulcer development in a high-risk nursing home population receiving evidence-based pressure ulcer prevention: Results from a study in 26 nursing homes in Belgium

The aim of this study was to identify independent risk factors for pressure ulcer (PU) development in a high-risk nursing home population receiving evidence-based PU prevention. This study was part of a randomised controlled trial examining the (cost-)effectiveness of static air support surfaces compared with alternating pressure air mattresses. The sample consisted of 308 residents at a high risk of PU development (presence of non-blanchable erythema, Braden score ≤ 12 or Braden subscale "mobility" ≤ 2). PU incidence was monitored for 14 days. Demographic variables; functional, physical, and psychological characteristics; and data on skin assessment were collected. Independent risk factors were identified using multiple logistic regression analysis. The overall PU incidence (category II-IV) was 8.4% (n = 26), and 1.9% (n = 6) of the residents developed a deep PU (category III-IV). PUs (category II-IV) were significantly associated with non-blanchable erythema, a lower Braden score, and pressure area-related pain in high-risk residents even if preventive care was provided. These results highlight the need of a systematic risk assessment, including pain assessment and skin observations, in order to determine and tailor preventive care to the needs of high-risk individuals.

Microclimate: A critical review in the context of pressure ulcer prevention

Pressure ulcers are caused by sustained mechanical loading and deformation of the skin and subcutaneous layers between internal stiff anatomical structures and external surfaces or devices. In addition, the skin microclimate (temperature, humidity and airflow next to the skin surface) is an indirect pressure ulcer risk factor. Temperature and humidity affect the structure and function of the skin increasing or lowering possible damage thresholds for the skin and underlying soft tissues. From a pressure ulcer prevention research perspective, the effects of humidity and temperature next to the skin surface are inextricably linked to concurrent soft tissue deformation. Direct clinical evidence supporting the association between microclimate and pressure ulceration is sparse and of high risk of bias. Currently, it is recommended to keep the skin dry and cool and/or to allow recovery periods between phases of occlusion. The stratum corneum must be prevented from becoming overhydrated or from drying out but exact ranges of an acceptable microclimate are unknown. Therefore, vague terms like 'microclimate management' should be avoided but product and microclimate characteristics should be explicitly stated to allow an informed decision making. Pressure ulcer prevention interventions like repositioning, the use of special support surfaces, cushions, and prophylactic dressings are effective only if they reduce sustained deformations in soft tissues. This mode of action outweighs possible undesirable microclimate properties. As long as uncertainty exists efforts must be taken to use as less occlusive materials as possible. There seems to be individual intrinsic characteristics making patients more vulnerable to microclimate effects.

Support surfaces for treating pressure ulcers

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers are treated by reducing pressure on the areas of damaged skin. Special support surfaces (including beds, mattresses and cushions) designed to redistribute pressure, are widely used as treatments. The relative effects of different support surfaces are unclear. This is an update of an existing review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pressure-relieving support surfaces in the treatment of pressure ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2017 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs), that assessed the effects of support surfaces for treating pressure ulcers, in any participant group or setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction, assessment of 'Risk of bias' and GRADE assessments were performed independently by two review authors. Trials with similar participants, comparisons and outcomes were considered for meta-analysis. Where meta-analysis was inappropriate, we reported the results of the trials narratively. Where possible, we planned to report data as either risk ratio or mean difference as appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update we identified one new trial of support surfaces for pressure ulcer treatment, bringing the total to 19 trials involving 3241 participants. Most trials were small, with sample sizes ranging from 20 to 1971, and were generally at high or unclear risk of bias.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

healing of existing pressure ulcersLow-tech constant pressure support surfacesIt is uncertain whether profiling beds increase the proportion of pressure ulcer which heal compared with standard hospital beds as the evidence is of very low certainty: (RR 3.96, 95% CI 1.28 to 12.24), downgraded for serious risk of bias, serious imprecision and indirectness (1 study; 70 participants).There is currently no clear difference in ulcer healing between water-filled support surfaces and foam replacement mattresses: (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.37); low-certainty evidence downgraded for serious risk of bias and serious imprecision (1 study; 120 participants).Further analysis could not be performed for polyester overlays versus gel overlays (1 study; 72 participants), non-powered mattresses versus low-air-loss mattresses (1 study; 20 participants) or standard hospital mattresses with sheepskin overlays versus standard hospital mattresses (1 study; 36 participants).High-tech pressure support surfacesIt is currently unclear whether high-tech pressure support surfaces (such as low-air-loss beds, air suspension beds, and alternating pressure surfaces) improve the healing of pressure ulcers (14 studies; 2923 participants) or which intervention may be more effective. The certainty of the evidence is generally low, downgraded mostly for risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision.Secondary outcomesNo analyses were undertaken with respect to secondary outcomes including participant comfort and surface reliability and acceptability as reporting of these within the included trials was very limited.Overall, the evidence is of low to very low certainty and was primarily downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision with some indirectness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, it is unclear whether any particular type of low- or high-tech support surface is more effective at healing pressure ulcers than standard support surfaces.

Prescription of pressure injury preventative interventions following risk assessment: An exploratory, descriptive study

This exploratory, descriptive study aimed to identify and describe the pressure injury preventative interventions prescribed by nurses following the assessment of a patient's pressure injury risk and to compare the prescribed interventions relative to the assessed risk level. A total of 200 inpatients in a tertiary Australian hospital were included. Patients' charts were audited within 24 hours of admission. Data collected included patient characteristics, pressure injury risk assessment score and level, and preventative interventions prescribed. Most patients were assessed as not being at risk, with the largest group of at-risk patients assessed as being at high risk. Some not-at-risk patients were prescribed interventions intended for those at risk, while prescription rates of preventative interventions recommended for those at any level of risk were variable (6%-64%). Significant associations were found between assessed pressure injury risk and preventative intervention prescription. Preventative intervention prescription was inadequate, potentially exposing some patients to pressure injury. However, the association between intervention prescription and risk level suggests that nurses are prescribing interventions relative to risk. A more structured approach to intervention prescription according to risk level, such as a care bundle, may help to improve nurses' preventative intervention prescription and ensure that all at-risk patients receive appropriate preventative interventions.

Reducing pressure ulcers in patients with prolonged acute mechanical ventilation: a quasi-experimental study

Objective:

To determine the effectiveness of a quality management program in reducing the incidence and severity of pressure ulcers in critical care patients.

Methods:

This was a quasi-experimental, before-and-after study that was conducted in a medical-surgical intensive care unit. Consecutive patients who had received mechanical ventilation for ≥ 96 hours were included. A "Process Improvement" team designed a multifaceted interventional process that consisted of an educational session, a pressure ulcer checklist, a smartphone application for lesion monitoring and decision-making, and a "family prevention bundle".

Results:

Fifty-five patients were included in Pre-I group, and 69 were included in the Post-I group, and the incidence of pressure ulcers in these groups was 41 (75%) and 37 (54%), respectively. The median time for pressure ulcers to develop was 4.5 [4 - 5] days in the Pre-I group and 9 [6 - 20] days in the Post-I group after admission for each period. The incidence of advanced-grade pressure ulcers was 27 (49%) in the Pre-I group and 7 (10%) in the Post-I group, and finally, the presence of pressure ulcers at discharge was 38 (69%) and 18 (26%), respectively (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Family participation totaled 9% in the Pre-I group and increased to 57% in the Post-I group (p < 0.05). A logistic regression model was used to analyze the predictors of advanced-grade pressure ulcers. The duration of mechanical ventilation and the presence of organ failure were positively associated with the development of pressure ulcers, while the multifaceted intervention program acted as a protective factor.

Conclusion:

A quality program based on both a smartphone application and family participation can reduce the incidence and severity of pressure ulcers in patients on prolonged acute mechanical ventilation.

Prevention of pressure ulcers with a static air support surface: A systematic review

The aims of this study were to identify, assess, and summarise available evidence about the effectiveness of static air mattress overlays to prevent pressure ulcers. The primary outcome was the incidence of pressure ulcers. Secondary outcomes included costs and patient comfort. This study was a systematic review. Six electronic databases were consulted: Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed (Medline), CINAHL (EBSCOhost interface), Science direct, and Web of Science. In addition, a hand search through reviews, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of the included studies was performed to identify additional studies. Potential studies were reviewed and assessed by 2 independent authors based on the title and abstract. Decisions regarding inclusion or exclusion of the studies were based on a consensus between the authors. Studies were included if the following criteria were met: reporting an original study; the outcome was the incidence of pressure ulcer categories I to IV when using a static air mattress overlay and/or in comparison with other pressure-redistribution device(s); and studies published in English, French, and Dutch. No limitation was set on study setting, design, and date of publication. The methodological quality assessment was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program Tool. Results were reported in a descriptive way to reflect the exploratory nature of the review. The searches included 13 studies: randomised controlled trials (n = 11) and cohort studies (n = 2). The mean pressure ulcer incidence figures found in the different settings were, respectively, 7.8% pressure ulcers of categories II to IV in nursing homes, 9.06% pressure ulcers of categories I to IV in intensive care settings, and 12% pressure ulcers of categories I to IV in orthopaedic wards. Seven comparative studies reported a lower incidence in the groups of patients on a static air mattress overlay. Three studies reported a statistical (P < .1) lower incidence compared with a standard hospital mattress (10 cm thick, density 35 kg/m³ ), a foam mattress (15 cm thick), and a viscoelastic foam mattress (15 cm thick). No significant difference in incidence, purchase costs, and patient comfort was found compared with dynamic air mattresses. This review focused on the effectiveness of static air mattress overlays to prevent pressure ulcers. There are indications that these mattress overlays are more effective in preventing pressure ulcers compared with the use of a standard mattress or a pressure-reducing foam mattress in nursing homes and intensive care settings. However, interpretation of the evidence should be performed with caution due to the wide variety of methodological and/or reporting quality levels of the included studies.

Support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention: A network meta-analysis

Background

Pressure ulcers are a prevalent and global issue and support surfaces are widely used for preventing ulceration. However, the diversity of available support surfaces and the lack of direct comparisons in RCTs make decision-making difficult.

Objectives

To determine, using network meta-analysis, the relative effects of different support surfaces in reducing pressure ulcer incidence and comfort and to rank these support surfaces in order of their effectiveness.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, using a literature search up to November 2016, to identify randomised trials comparing support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. We grouped the support surfaces according to their characteristics and formed evidence networks using these groups. We used network meta-analysis to estimate the relative effects and effectiveness ranking of the groups for the outcomes of pressure ulcer incidence and participant comfort. GRADE was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

Main results

We included 65 studies in the review. The network for assessing pressure ulcer incidence comprised evidence of low or very low certainty for most network contrasts. There was moderate-certainty evidence that powered active air surfaces and powered hybrid air surfaces probably reduce pressure ulcer incidence compared with standard hospital surfaces (risk ratios (RR) 0.42, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.29 to 0.63; 0.22, 0.07 to 0.66, respectively). The network for comfort suggested that powered active air-surfaces are probably slightly less comfortable than standard hospital mattresses (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.94; moderate-certainty evidence).

Conclusions

This is the first network meta-analysis of the effects of support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention. Powered active air-surfaces probably reduce pressure ulcer incidence, but are probably less comfortable than standard hospital surfaces. Most prevention evidence was of low or very low certainty, and more research is required to reduce these uncertainties.

Review of the Current Management of Pressure Ulcers

Significance: The incidence of pressure ulcers is increasing due to our aging population and the increase in the elderly living with disability. Learning how to manage pressure ulcers appropriately is increasingly important for all professionals in wound care. Recent Advances: Many new dressings and treatment modalities have been developed over the recent years and the goal of this review is to highlight their benefits and drawbacks to help providers choose their tools appropriately. Critical Issues: Despite an increased number of therapies available on the market, none has demonstrated any clear benefit over the others and pressure ulcer treatment remains frustrating and time-consuming. Future Directions: Additional research is needed to develop products more effective in prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers.

Development and psychometric validation of a questionnaire to evaluate nurses' adherence to recommendations for preventing pressure ulcers (QARPPU)

AIM OF THE STUDY

The main objective of this work is the development and psychometric validation of an instrument to evaluate nurses' adherence to the main recommendations issued for preventing pressure ulcers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An instrument was designed based on the main recommendations for the prevention of pressure ulcers published in various clinical practice guides. Subsequently, it was proceeded to evaluate the face and content validity of the instrument by an expert group. It has been applied to 249 Spanish nurses took part in a cross-sectional study to obtain a psychometric evaluation (reliability and construct validity) of the instrument. The study data were compiled from June 2015 to July 2016.

RESULTS

From the results of the psychometric analysis, a final 18-item, 4-factor questionnaire was derived, which explained 60.5% of the variance and presented the following optimal indices of fit (CMIN/DF: 1.40 p < 0.001; GFI: 0.93; NFI: 0.92; CFI: 0.98; TLI: 0.97; RMSEA: 0.04 (90% CI 0.025-0.054).

CONCLUSIONS

The results obtained show that the instrument presents suitable psychometric properties for evaluating nurses' adherence to recommendations for the prevention of pressure ulcers.

Adherence to evidence-based pressure injury prevention guidelines in routine clinical practice: a longitudinal study

The aim of this longitudinal study was to describe adherence to evidence-based pressure injury (PI) prevention guidelines in routine clinical practice in Australian hospitals. Data were analysed from four control sites of a larger-cluster randomised trial of a PI intervention. The sample of 799 included 220 (27·5%) Not at risk, 344 (43·1%) At risk and 110 (13·8%) At high risk patients. A total of 84 (10·5%) patients developed a PI during the study: 20 (9·0% of 220) in the Not at risk group, 45 (13·1% of 344) in the At risk group, 15 (13·6% of 110) in the At high risk group and 4 (3·2% of 125) patients who did not have a risk assessment completed. Of all patients, 165 (20·7%) received only one PI prevention strategy, and 494 (61·8%) received ≥2 strategies at some point during the study period. There was no statistical difference in the proportion of time the three risk groups received ≥1 and ≥2 strategies; on average, this was less than half the time they were in the study. Thus, patients were not receiving PI prevention strategies consistently throughout their hospital stay, although it is possible patients' risk changed over the study period.

Support surfaces in the prevention of pressure ulcers in surgical patients: An integrative review

AIM

To assess the scientific evidence about the types of support surfaces used in intraoperative surgical practice in the prevention of pressure ulcers due to surgical positioning.

METHOD

This is an integrative literature review. The electronic databases Cochrane, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Lilacs, and CINAHL were used. The descriptors surgical patients, support surfaces, perioperative care, patient positioning, and pressure ulcer were used in the search strategy. Articles that addressed the use of support surfaces intraoperatively, published between 1990 and 2016, were selected. The PRISMA guidelines were used to structure the review.

RESULTS

Of 18 evaluated studies, most were in English, followed by Portuguese and Spanish; most were performed by nurses. The most commonly cited support surfaces were viscoelastic polymer, micropulse mattresses, gel based mattresses, and foam devices.

CONCLUSION

There are gaps in knowledge regarding the most efficient support surfaces and the specifications of the products used to prevent pressure ulcers due to surgical positioning.

Does participating in a clinical trial affect subsequent nursing management? Post-trial care for participants recruited to the INTACT pressure ulcer prevention trial: A follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Participation in a clinical trial is believed to benefit patients but little is known about the post-trial effects on routine hospital-based care.

OBJECTIVES

To describe (1) hospital-based, pressure ulcer care-processes after patients were discharged from a pressure ulcer prevention, cluster randomised controlled trial; and (2) to investigate if the trial intervention had any impact on subsequent hospital-based care.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 133 trial participants who developed a pressure ulcer during the clinical trial. We compared outcomes and care processes between participants who received the pressure ulcer prevention intervention and those in the usual care, control group. We also compared care processes according to the pressure ulcer stage.

RESULTS

A repositioning schedule was reported for 19 (14.3%) patients; 33 (24.8%) had a dressing applied to the pressure ulcer; 17 (12.8) patients were assessed by a wound care team; and 20 (15.0%) were seen by an occupational therapist. Patients in the trial's intervention group were more likely to have the presence of a pressure ulcer documented in their chart (odds ratio (OR) 8.18, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 3.64-18.36); to be referred to an occupational therapist OR 0.92 (95% CI 0.07; 0.54); to receive a pressure relieving device OR 0.31 (95% CI 0.14; 0.69); or a pressure relieving mattress OR 0.44 (95% CI 0.20; 0.96). Participants with Stage 2 or unstageable ulcers were more likely than others to have dressings applied to their wounds (p=<0.001) and to be referred to an occupational therapist for protective devices (p=0.022).

CONCLUSION

Participants in the intervention group of a clinical trial were more likely to receive additional post trial care and improved documentation compared with those in the control group but documentation of pressure ulcer status and care is poor.

Topical phenytoin for treating pressure ulcers

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers are common in clinical practice and pose a significant health problem worldwide. Apart from causing suffering to patients, they also result in longer hospital stays and increase the cost of health care. A variety of methods are used for treating pressure ulcers, including pressure relief, patient repositioning, biophysical strategies, nutritional supplementation, debridement, topical negative pressure, and local treatments including dressings, ointments and creams such as bacitracin, silver sulphadiazine, neomycin, and phenytoin. Phenytoin is a drug more commonly used in the treatment of epilepsy, but may play an important role in accelerating ulcer healing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of topical phenytoin on the rate of healing of pressure ulcers of any grade, in any care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2016, we searched the following electronic databases to identify relevant randomized clinical trials: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We handsearched conference proceedings from the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, European Wound Management Association and the Tissue Viability Society for all available years. We searched the references of the retrieved trials to identify further relevant trials. We also searched clinical trials registries to identify ongoing and unpublished studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the effects (both benefits and harms) of topical phenytoin on the healing of pressure ulcers of any grade compared with placebo or alternative treatments or no therapy, irrespective of blinding, language, and publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted information on participants, interventions, methods and results and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane methodological procedures. For dichotomous variables, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous variables, we calculated the mean difference with 95% CI. We rated the quality of the evidence by using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE).

MAIN RESULTS

Three small RCTs met our inclusion criteria and included a total of 148 participants. These compared three treatments with topical phenytoin: hydrocolloid dressings, triple antibiotic ointment and simple dressings. In the three RCTs, 79% of participants had grade II ulcers, and 21% of participants had grade I ulcers; no participants had grade III or IV ulcers. Two RCTs had a high risk of bias overall and the other RCT was at unclear risk of bias due to poor reporting. Two RCTs had three intervention arms and the other had two intervention arms.Two studies compared topical phenytoin with hydrocolloid dressing (84 participants analysed). The available data suggest that hydrocolloid dressings may improve ulcer healing compared to topical phenytoin (39.3% ulcers healed for phenytoin versus 71.4% ulcers healed for hydrocolloid dressings (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.92; 56 participants, 1 study; low quality evidence). We downgraded the evidence twice: once due to serious limitations (high risk of bias) and once due to the small sample size and small number of events. Two studies compared topical phenytoin with simple dressings (81 participants analysed). From the available data, we are uncertain whether topical phenytoin improves ulcer healing compared to simple dressings (39.3% ulcers healed for phenytoin versus 29.6% ulcers healed for the simple dressing (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.78; 55 participants, 1 study; very low quality evidence). This evidence was downgraded once due to serious limitations (high risk of bias) and twice due to the low number of outcome events and resulting wide CI which included the possibility of both increased healing and reduced healing. We therefore considered it to be insufficient to determine the effect of topical phenytoin on ulcer healing. One study compared topical phenytoin with triple antibiotic ointment, however, none of the outcomes of interest to this review were reported. No adverse drug reactions or interactions were detected in any of the three RCTs. Minimal pain was reported in all groups in one trial that compared topical phenytoin with hydrocolloid dressings and triple antibiotic ointment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review has considered the available evidence and the result shows that it is uncertain whether topical phenytoin improves ulcer healing for patients with grade I and II pressure ulcers. No adverse events were reported from three small trials and minimal pain was reported in one trial. Therefore, further rigorous, adequately powered RCTs examining the effects of topical phenytoin for treating pressure ulcers, and to report on adverse events, quality of life and costs are necessary.

Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers represent a major burden to patients, carers and the healthcare system, affecting approximately 1 in 17 hospital and 1 in 20 community patients. They impact greatly on an individual's functional status and health-related quality of life. The mainstay of pressure ulcer prevention practice is the provision of pressure redistribution support surfaces and patient repositioning. The aim of the PRESSURE 2 study is to compare the two main mattress types utilised within the NHS: high-specification foam and alternating pressure mattresses, in the prevention of pressure ulcers.

METHODS/DESIGN

PRESSURE 2 is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, double triangular, group sequential, parallel group trial. A maximum of 2954 'high-risk' patients with evidence of acute illness will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to receive either a high-specification foam mattress or alternating-pressure mattress in conjunction with an electric profiling bed frame. The primary objective of the trial is to compare mattresses in terms of the time to developing a new Category 2 or above pressure ulcer by 30 days post end of treatment phase. Secondary endpoints include time to developing new Category 1 and 3 or above pressure ulcers, time to healing of pre-existing Category 2 pressure ulcers, health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness, incidence of mattress change and safety. Validation objectives are to determine the responsiveness of the Pressure Ulcer Quality of Life-Prevention instrument and the feasibility of having a blinded endpoint assessment using photography. The trial will have a maximum of three planned analyses with unequally spaced reviews at event-driven coherent cut-points. The futility boundaries are constructed as non-binding to allow a decision for stopping early to be overruled by the Data Monitoring and Ethics Committee.

DISCUSSION

The double triangular, group sequential design of the PRESSURE 2 trial will provide an efficient design through the possibility of early stopping for demonstrating either superiority, inferiority of mattresses or futility of the trial. The trial optimises the potential for producing robust clinical evidence on the effectiveness of two commonly used mattresses in clinical practice earlier than in a conventional design.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN01151335 . Registered on 14 May 2013. Protocol version: 5.0, dated 25 September 2015 Trial sponsor: Clare Skinner, Faculty Head of Research Support, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT; 0113 343 4897; C.E.Skinner@leeds.ac.uk.

Nursing documentation of pressure ulcers in nursing homes: comparison of record content and patient examinations

Aim

The aim of this study was to describe the accuracy and quality of nursing documentation of the prevalence, risk factors and prevention of pressure ulcers, and compare retrospective audits of nursing documentation with patient examinations conducted in nursing homes.

Design

This study used a cross‐sectional descriptive design.

Method

A retrospective audit of 155 patients' records and patient examinations using the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel form and the Braden scale, conducted in January and February 2013.

Results

The prevalence of pressure ulcers was 38 (26%) in the audit of the patient records and 33 (22%) in patient examinations. A total of 17 (45%) of the documented pressure ulcers were not graded. When comparing the patient examinations with the patient record contents, the patient records lacked information about pressure ulcers and preventive interventions.

Effects of gelatin sponge combined with moist wound-healing nursing intervention in the treatment of phase III bedsore

Pressure sore pertains to tissue damage or necrosis that occurs due to lack of adequate nutrition following long-term exposure to pressure and decreased blood circulation. The aim of the study was to examine the effects of gelatin sponge combined with moist wound-healing nursing intervention in the treatment of phase III bedsore. In total, 50 patients with phase III bedsore were included in the present study. The patients were randomly divided into the control (n=25) and observation (n=25) groups. Patients in the control group received conventional nursing, while those in the observation group received gelatin sponge combined with moist wound healing nursing. The effects of the two nursing methods were compared and analyzed. The results showed that the improvement rate of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). The Branden score and area of pressure sore of the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group (P<0.05). The frequency and time of dressing change and the average cost of hospitalization of the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group (P<0.001). In conclusion, gelatin sponge combined with moist wound-healing nursing intervention may significantly improve the treatment of phase III bedsore.

Reliability of the special support system for sitting pressure redistribution

[Purpose] This study investigated the reliability of the Special Support System. [Subjects and Methods] Eighteen female and 14 male volunteers participated in this study. Participants were asked to sit on the Special Support System with their chins tucked in, spines straight, pelvis neutrally positioned, and their hands placed on their thighs. They were also asked to flex their hips, knees, and ankles to approximately 90 degrees and to put their feet flat on the floor. The total contact area, mean total pressure, as well as mean and peak pressures of each quadrant were each measured 15 times. Test-retest reliability was analyzed for inflated air pressure, and pressure redistribution values by using intraclass correlation coefficients. [Results] The intraclass correlation coefficient was greater than 0.89 for inflated air pressure and greater than 0.92 for total contact area, mean total pressure, and each quadrant’s mean and peak pressure. [Conclusion] The findings suggest that the Special Support System is reliable and can be used as an alternative method for redistributing sitting pressure.